I love CapGeek, so this is not a rant or a criticism of them. However, I feel compelled to write this fanpost in order to edumacate my fellow MHHers on some of the limitations of CapGeek. This urging stems from both my recent FanPost concerning money paid to players, as well as, a general feeling I get from reading comments. I have this nagging concern that many people don't have a firm understanding on how players are paid in general and how the numbers in CapGeek are wrong, 100% of the time, specifically.
Here are some points to keep in mind as you peruse the copious amounts of salary and cap data at CapGeek.
1) Entry Level Contract's. Nobody knows how much bonus money any players gets on their ELC's, not even CapGeek. All top draft picks from any given draft receive the same base pay. On top of that base pay, they receive two kinds on bonuses. The first kind is for meeting certain team goals (games played, minutes, goals, save percentage, etc.). Neither the goals, nor the amounts of the payouts are public knowledge, but it is not more than $850k in any given year. The second kind of bonus is for either winning/placing for an award or being among the top players in the NHL in certain statistical categories. For these bonuses, the league pays the player money that does not count against the cap. Furthermore, the team has the option to also pay a bonus on these categories. Once again, bonus money paid by the team is NOT public knowledge. Since CapGeek does not have this information, they simply assume that every ELC player receives every possible bonus (including winning the Hart trophy) every year of their contract. They do this because the theoretical maximum payout is the cap hit of the contract, not the amount actually paid. The result of this is that CapGeek has incorrect amounts paid for most ELC contracts.
2) Contract Amounts. CapGeek only lists the amount of money in a player's contract, but not the amount of money the player was actually paid. Since the introduction of the cap, not one player has EVER received the amount of money stated on their contract. It is a near statistical impossibility this to happen. Why? Players are paid a fixed amount of money by the owners, currently 50% of Hockey Related Revenue. No contract can cause the owners to pay more, or less, money. The number on a player's contact is NOT the amount of money they are paid. It more accurately represents a percentage of the player share. Last season, ROR was paid $6.5 million divided by the total salary amount of all players times the players share of revenue, NOT $6.5 million. In order for ROR to have made exactly $6.5 million, the amount of all contracts issued (including buyouts) would have to exactly match 50% of HHR taken in by the owners. During the first CBA, the players were paid between 104% of their contracts for the best year and 87% of their contracts in the worst year. When showing total earning of a player, CapGeek does not adjust the contract amount by the amount actually paid. The result of this is a that CapGeek is wrong 100% of the time on earnings of any current player (payouts before the cap worked differently).
CapGeek is a great tool for determining cap related amounts, but in a Cap world, there is a strong disconnect between cap hits and money actually paid. CapGeek is a great resource on the former, but a terrible resource on the latter.